No. 168.
Mr. Angell
to Mr. Blaine.
Legation of
the United States,
Peking, July 16, 1881.
(Received September 3.)
No. 186.]
Sir: On the morning of June 20, I mailed to you my
dispatch No. 174, which informed you of the attempt of the Northern
Telegraph Company to secure for twenty years the exclusive right to land
telegraphic cables in China.
On the afternoon of that day I had business at the foreign office, and
learned that the ministers had received from Li Hung Chang an answer to the
letter of inquiry which, agreeably to their promise to me, they had sent to
him. They said they would send the answer to me, but they evidently
preferred not to discuss the main subject until I had read the viceroy’s
letter. I therefore contented myself with again expressing the conviction
that my government would be most strongly opposed to the scheme.
Soon after I received a communication from Prince Kung, embodying evidently
only a portion of the viceroy’s letter. I inclose a copy. The viceroy’s
statements are somewhat obscure. He wishes to leave the impression that an
agreement has not been drawn; but surely the paper which I inclosed in No.
174 is an agreement, and I have no doubt of its genuineness. The viceroy’s
words seem to indicate that he is perhaps conscious of having gone too fast
and too far before consulting the Imperial Government. He would apparently
have us understand that no promise has been made beyond that of the
privilege of exclusive connection with the new land line from Shanghai to
Tientsin. Yet, at once and inconsistently, he pleads the examples of France
and Russia in making concessions as precedents for the monopoly proposed
here. It is possible that by making extracts from his paper injustice has
been done to it. But it does not seem frank and ingenuous as given to
me.
For certain reasons, and especially for the reason that the British and
German ministers were conferring with the ministers on the subject, I
delayed further discussion upon the matter until July 13.
I began my interview on that day by saying that I found the viceroy’s words
somewhat obscure, and begged the ministers to inform me exactly what is the
request of the telegaph company. With their usual
[Page 280]
reluctance to convey information until they see that
you have it, they said at first that they did not know exactly, since the
viceroy had carried on the business without consulting them. But when I drew
the agreement from my pocket and asked if it did not distinctly forbid an
American company to land a cable in China for twenty years, they confessed
that it did. They then asked me to repeat my objections to the plan, which I
did at length. After a prolonged conversation they said if I would send them
my views in writing they would send them to the viceroy and ask him to
modify the scheme in such a manner as not to preclude us from laying a
cable. They assured me that they did not wish to give offense to the United
States.
I do not report my remarks, because the substance of them is found in the
communication to Prince Kung, which, in compliance with the request of the
ministers, I have sent in. I inclose a copy.
There were present at the interview their excellencies Mao, Wang, Ch’ung, and
Hsia. I have of course had to proceed entirely without instructions in this
business, but trust my action may meet with the approval of the Department.
I cannot venture to predict the result.
I have, &c.,
[Inclosure 1 in No. 186.]
Prince Kung to Mr.
Angell.
On the 13th June, your excellency came to this office and spoke about an
agreement having been entered into between the Great Northern Telegraph
Company and the viceroy Li, by which the said company were to enjoy a
twenty years’ monopoly during which time no other company would be
allowed to land telegraph cables in China, &c.
This office thereupon wrote to inquire of the viceroy Li, and an answer
has been received from him, in which he says:
“According to international law among western nations, railways,
telegraphs, etc., are matters about which each nation can do as it
pleases; either the country builds them itself or allows public
companies to build them. The line of telegraph which last year it was
proposed to establish between Shanghai and Tientsin was designed with a
view to having direct and rapid communication with the outside world,
remembering this we cannot do otherwise than negotiate with the Great
Northern Telegraph Company to connect our line with their cable The said
company has done its utmost to assist us honestly in purchasing
materials and hiring workmen to build this first line, and has begged
for (a similar understanding) like the terms of the agreement made
between the company and the Governments of France and Russia. There
appears to be no reason why the request should not be granted. The
company have only begged me to grant their request, but have not asked
that an agreement be drawn. I find nothing in all this that is contrary
to international law of western nations. I herewith forward for your
inspection translations of the agreements between the Great Northern
Telegraph Company and the Governments of France and Russia. (It will be
seen that) the agreement with Russia is for a period of thirty years,
and that with France for a period of twenty-five years. In this
instance, it is only for the Shanghai cable that a twenty years’
(monopoly) has been granted. It is not I who have made the precedent,”
&c.
It will be seen that in managing this business the viceroy has made rules
fixing a limitation in years, like what Russia and France have already
done. It behooves us to send copies of the agreement between the Great
Northern Telegraph Company and France and Russia for your excellency’s
inspection.
[Inclosure 2 in No. 186.]
Mr. Angell to
Prince Kung.
Your Imperial Highness: A few weeks ago I
received a copy of an agreement which the Northern Telegraph Company ask
His Imperial Majesty’s Government to
[Page 281]
make, forbidding any person or corporation, except
the northern company, to land a telegraph cable anywhere in the empire
for a period of twenty years.
I have had three interviews with the ministers of the foreign office on
the subject, and have received from them one communication embodying
certain statements of the viceroy Li with whom the company seem to have
carried on their negotiations. The ministers have now asked me to state
in writing my objections to the proposed scheme, and I therefore submit
this paper in compliance with their request. The first two articles of
the agreement in my copy read as follows:
“1st. The Chinese Government guarantees to the Great Northern Telegraph
Company exclusive monopoly of their submarine cables already landed in
Chinese territory. Should the company desire to land other cables in
China, the permission of the Chinese Government must first be asked and
obtained. Within a period of twenty years from date the Chinese
Government will not allow any other person to land telegraph cables in
the entire empire, including all foreign settlements and Formosa.
“2d. Within the same period of twenty years the Chinese Government will
not construct, or permit others to construct, submarine cables or
telegraph lines by land in opposition to any of the company’s cables in
China. Where there is no competition with the interests of the company
the Chinese Government will build lines at their pleasure.” Now, in
regard to these articles pemit me to say:
I. I trust I shall not be deemed obtrusive if I express the opinion that
the proposed arrangement is of very doubtful expediency for China
herself, and for three reasons:
- 1st.
- Although the United States have made earnest efforts to have
ocean cables “neutralized” in case of war so that they shall not
be disturbed, the efforts have not been successful. In case of
war between some western nation and Denmark or China, the
northern company’s lines might be destroyed, and China would
lose telegraphic connection with the world. But if other lines
are laid, China might through some one of them be able to keep
up communication with her ministers abroad and with all
nations.
- 2d.
- By the second article China cuts herself off from constructing
land lines to Foo Chow, Canton, and other points in the south
which she may very much need, especially if the northern cable
is injured in war. China thus pays too high a price for the
trifling advantage she gains of sending dispatches free to her
ministers and consuls.
- 3d.
- All experience has shown that monopolies for long periods are
subject to great abuses, and tend to create much
ill-feeling.
It is only in exceptional cases that it is found wise to grant them. I
respectfully submit that the cases mentioned in the extracts from the
viceroy’s letter are so different from this that they ought not to be
considered as precedents for a request like that now made. The submarine
line from France to Denmark cannot be practically a monopoly, because
the countries are connected through Germany by land lines. The Russian
concession was for a line in a very remote region where the risk of loss
was great, and where no company perhaps would venture to build a line
without a guarantee for a reasonable period that it should have an
exclusive privilege.
But surely the case is very different here where it is proposed to cut
off the United States and even China herself from building lines, which
may be in the highest degree important to China in order to guarantee
returns to a company which is understood to be already very richly
remunerated by its business.
II. But speaking especially on behalf of the United States, I am certain
that I cannot use too strong language to express the disappointment and
regret, I had almost said the sense of injustice which my government
will feel if His Imperial Majesty’s Government shall bind itself in such
terms that no American company can lay a cable within twenty years from
our country to your shores, when a Danish company is allowed an
unrestricted privilege of telegraphic communication with Europe.
Fifteen years ago, in 1866, Mr. Burlingame, has recorded in our archives,
the ministers gave him a verbal permission for an American company to
lay a cable along the coast. I cannot think that His Majesty’s
Government will now be less liberal in its policy.
Even if the government thinks it wise to give the northern company the
monopoly for the connection with Europe, there seems no reason for
forbidding a line from America, which can in no proper sense be
considered as a competing line with the European. The messages to
America do indeed have to be sent now by the northern line. But the
expense of sending by that line is so great that the business is only a
small part of the entire business of the line, and only a small part of
what should be given to a direct line to America.
His Majesty’s Government surely cannot forget that a considerable number
of his subjects are now resident in the Sandwich Islands, and many more
in America. Moreover, enterprising Chinese merchants are beginning to
send steamships to America and to enlarge their business. Every year the
commercial relations of the two nations are becoming more important. It
is of the greatest consequence to the fostering of this commerce so
useful to both nations that the largest facilities be afforded for
postal and telegraphic intercourse, both for individuals and for the
governments.
It must be known to your imperial highness that the United States have
long been
[Page 282]
engaged in making,
soundings to determine the best line for a telegraph across the Pacific
Ocean. A great deal has already been expended in making the necessary
investigations. It has never so much as occurred to our government that
His Majesty’s Government would refuse to us the privilege granted to the
Danish company of landing the cable, if an American company should, to
the great advantage of both countries, incur the enormous expense of
laying a line of probably more than 22,000 li, for such would be the
length of a line laid from San Francisco to the Sandwich Islands, Japan,
and Shanghai.
I must, therefore, most respectfully urge that no plan be adopted by His
Imperial Majesty’s Government which will prevent an American company
from landing a cable at Shanghai. I cannot too earnestly and too
emphatically make known to you in advance the force with which, in my
opinion, my government will remonstrate against so marked a
discrimination in favor of the Danish company to the exclusion of an
American company which may propose to lay a line where the Danish
company has never proposed to lay one, namely, between America and
China. I trust, therefore, that whatever concessions are made to the
Northern Telegraph Company, His Imperial Majesty’s Government will not,
in any way, bind itself to forbid the landing of a cable from America or
the transmission of messages from such a cable over any of the inland
lines which may be constructed in China.
I am, &c.,
